How many of you feel that the label "atheist" is insufficient as a term. I rather like "skeptic" or "rationalist". Any other suggestions, and feel free to expand on the problem of labelling in general.
The term "Agnostic" really bothers me more. It simply means "that you cannot prove or disprove god and/or religion" therefore if you are "Athiest" you are ALSO "Agnostic". One does not follow the other. I feel "Skeptic" is to broad to be left to define religion alone. I am "Skeptic" of alot of things- alien abductions, psychics, ect. I do like the term "non-theist" although I guess it could be construed as negative aswell. "Athiest" is all inclusive and familiar. It's a word the religious secs have deamed dirty, not us. And our lack of ability or fear of using it has left us much more individualized then we should be. National polls show slim numbers of Americans are "Athiest" but when terms like "agnostic" and "non-beliver" are included that number rises to over 40 million in the US alone. Why should we reject the term that best defines and describes and is the most recognized just because it makes the other people nervous.
I am an athiest since the word applies to the subject of god. I'm also a skeptic and disagree that a skeptic simply doubts and has no answers. Because I am a rationalist I'm inevitably skeptical about things that just don't seem right. Than the research follows. I don't see a need for label revision.
''Across the world, and increasingly in Europe and the UK, a unique Christian evangelical movement is growing. Cat McShane meets the British families who believe that almost all forms of birth control and contraception are an abuse of the gift of…